Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee
Minutes from the September 14, 2005 Meeting
Present:Mike Goldenberg
Mike Hanna
Prabhat Hajela
Amir Hirsa, chair
Sharon Kunkel
Chris McDermott
Carlos Lopez
Julie Leusner
Wally Morris
Lee Odell
John Schroeder
Dick Smith
Dave Spooner
Ken Warriner
Sam Wait
Mike Wozny
The minutes from the May 4, 2005 meeting were approved in a 5-0-7 vote with the following
amendments:
a. The statement on Organizations should read:
“Graduates will have an appreciation of building, creating, and sustaining organizations and an
understanding of the role and impact of organizations and institutions in society.”
b. Sam Wait should be listed just once on the list of attendees
1) Amir Hirsa asked the Committee for agenda items for upcoming year.

M. Hanna asked for clarification on the use of grade modifiers. He asked specifically
if the faculty have to use them. Committee members had differing opinions on
whether they were required or could be used at the discretion of the faculty. There
were concerns that if the use of the modifiers were the discretion of the faculty there
might be inconsistency in grading multi-section courses. Another concern was
whether this was a transition year for using the modifiers and in the future they
would be required. After some further discussion, the Committee agreed to review
the actual wording on the motion passed by the faculty to determine if any further
action was warranted.
 L. Odell indicated that he’d like to initiate the implementation process for the
communication requirements by organizing a Task Force. The Committee had no
objections.
 Core Outcomes
 Grade modifiers and monitoring - The first step is to assess what the faculty expected
from grade modifiers
 Scheduling of class times
 4 x 4- what is the status now? This is related to the scheduling times discussion
 Classroom constraints- This is also connected with scheduling issues.
The Committee agreed that determining the outcomes should come first. The outcomes should
drive the curriculum which in term will drive scheduling.
The School of Management &Technology (SoM&T) is looking at making significant changes in
their undergraduate degree program. C. McDermott asked if there are any constraints on
whether they develop 3 or 4 credit classes.
 Impact on faculty teaching load
Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee
Minutes from 9/14/05
 Flexibility in the curriculum
S. Kunkel will email the latest version of Core Outcomes as approved by the FSCC to the
committee members.











TAs in the classrooms- Although the graduate tuition policy is not the purview of
this committee there was a question about the number of TAs assigned to
undergraduate Math courses. The chair of the Math department will be invited to a
future meeting.
SoM&T- PhD students do not have responsibility for a course and so the students do
not receive a formal teaching evaluation. A. Hirsa suggested that the instructor
should be responsible for overseeing their teaching. Active participation of the PhD
student in teaching the class is ok and there are no policies which prohibit it. P.
Hajela suggested that the Dean of M&T bring this issue to the Deans Council for
further discussion.
Les Gerhardt as acting Dean of the Graduate School will be invited to any meetings
if there is a specific issue the FSCC would like him to address.
Minimum graduation GPA-Increase from 1.8 to 2.0
P. Hajela- He has asked the Faculty Senate to look at the deans list and also mid term
grading
Dual majors for IT students and “frivolous” duals where only 2 or 3 more courses are
required. The related issue of advising dual major students
Time limit on graduation for undergraduates
Depth and breadth in graduate programs
Transfer credit restrictions on incoming freshmen
Increasing size of undergraduate courses
AP credit for Intro to Biology
A. Hirsa will compile the list so the Committee can prioritize the topics for discussion.
2